03-09-2010 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 March 9, 2010 --------------------------- application to renewtheir existing CUP and license was processed and approved on February 16, 2010. Mr. Beck noted that the cell 17 issues have been resolved for their existing permit. He stated that it is not normal for a letter to be sent to a property owner for a text amendment, but the city did so. Commissioner Anderson stated that it has been the cites policy that whenever a buffer is required, it is within the applicant's property. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WESTBERG TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT AS PRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION DATED MARCH 9, 2010. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 5.6. Request by City of Elk River Ordinance Amendment Relating to Interim Use Permits, Public Hearing -Case No. OA 10-02 The staff report was presented byJeremyBarnhart. He noted that the amendment brings the cites ordinance into compliance with state law Chair Scott opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Scott closed the public hearing. Commissioner Anderson asked if adoption of the amendment would have any ramifications on existing interim use permits. Mr. Barnhart stated he was not aware of anyimpacts on • existing permits. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER IVES TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE CITY OF ELK RIVER FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING INTERIM USE PERMITS, AS PRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT TO THE COMMISSION DATED MARCH 9, 2010. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 5.7. Request by City of Elk River for Ordinance Amendment Relating to Definition for Parks. Public Hearing -Case No. OA 10-03 The staff report was presented byJeremyBarnhart. Chair Scott opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Scott closed the public hearing. Cornrnissioner Bell questioned why a body of water was not included. Mr. Barnhart explained. Commissioner Lemke asked if water adjacent to a park and used for recreational purposes should be a considered a park, such Lake Orono. Mr. Barnhart explained that there also could be water adjacent to privately-owned land could be used for recreational purposes and would not be a park Mr. Beck explained that public open space along a body of water is a park, but privately owned property, such as along the Mississippi, would not be a park •